Microsoft and Nokia have both warned Android OEMs that they should be wary of …

Google's purchase of Motorola Mobility changes the Android market in a profound way. Google is now in a position to be the next Apple or RIM: a vertically integrated smartphone company that produces both hardware and software. In turn, Microsoft and Nokia are trying to use fears over this possibility to bolster support for Windows Phone 7. Android OEMs may be wise to listen, but the message is a strange one to hear from those two companies, given their uniquely close relationship.

For the time being, at least, Google claims that Motorola will be operated as a "separate business unit"—it will be owned by Google, but operationally will function like any other Android licensee. However, a claim made in a Wall Street Journalprofile of Andy Rubin, the founder of Android Inc. and Google's senior vice president of Mobile, suggests that Google may not be telling the whole story. Specifically, the article says that "People close to the deal said one of Google's motivations was its desire to design devices, not just the software that powers them, thus giving it the sort of influence that rival Apple enjoys with its iPhone and iPad." Such a move would change the nature of the Google-Motorola relationship radically, and it's difficult to see how this wouldn't give Motorola a substantial advantage over other Android OEMs.

The appeal to Google of such an approach is plain: Apple makes a phenomenal amount of cash from its vertically integrated iPhone and iPad business, but for all the market share Android has won in the smartphone space, it doesn't appear to be doing much to bolster Google's bottom line. Even if Google doesn't see itself as a hardware company, it can't help but be envious of Apple's financial success: the iPhone alone generates about 50 percent more revenue for Apple than all of Google generates. With that kind of money on offer, it might be worth upsetting a few partners.

Such a strategy may well find support within Google. Andy Rubin is no stranger to vertical integration; prior to starting Android Inc., he co-founded Danger, the maker of the Hiptop, better known as the T-Mobile Sidekick. Danger not only built Hiptop's software; it also designed and commissioned the hardware manufacture (though the actual building work was done by Flextronics, Sharp, and for one model, Motorola).

Hardware design isn't the only thing that might trouble other OEMs. Court documents released in the ongoing court case between Microsoft and Motorola showed that Google has "highly proprietary" Android-related source code that its OEM partners, including Motorola, currently don't get access to. If Google does seek closer integration with Motorola than it's currently letting on, that too may give Motorola an advantage over the other OEMs.

Immediately after the announcement, the reaction from the major Android OEMs was consistently positive—remarkably so—and even with the claim made in the WSJ, the official line from the OEMs who responded to our requests for comment was just as gushing.

Microsoft and Nokia, however, were keen to warn the OEMs of the dangers this posed. Andy Lees, President of the Windows Phone Division, said in a statement, "Investing in a broad and truly open mobile ecosystem is important for the industry and consumers alike, and Windows Phone is now the only platform that does so with equal opportunity for all partners." Stephen Elop, Nokia CEO and former Microsoft employee, said similarly, "If I happened to be someone who was an Android manufacturer or an operator, or anyone with a stake in that environment, I would be picking up my phone and calling certain executives at Google and say, 'I see signs of danger ahead.'"

This might seem a slightly surprising move; Nokia is clearly Microsoft's preferred partner, and though the claims have always remained vague, both companies have indicated that Nokia has a greater ability to customize the platform than other OEMs. Nokia has precisely the kind of special treatment now that Microsoft is claiming Google will give in the future.

But if the WSJ's source is right about the motivation for the Motorola purchase and Google's hardware ambitions, the relationship between Google could be far closer than that between Nokia and Microsoft, and make Motorola far more privileged than Nokia currently is. That would certainly put other Android OEMs at a disadvantage, and that in turn could increase OEM support for Windows Phone.

Pointing out the risks is all well and good—though Microsoft and Nokia have the most to gain from Android OEM disquiet, they weren't the first to speculate about the purchase's impact on Android OEMs—but given the comments Nokia has made about the Windows Phone deal, the two companies' reaction doesn't ring true. If the companies were serious about this pushing this advantage to other device manufacturers, they should put an end to Nokia's special privileges and make categorically clear that the Finnish company can't actually do anything that the other OEMs can't do. Putting the Windows Phone OEMs on genuinely equal terms would be a far more convincing move.